RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-00187 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The term “personality disorder” be removed from her narrative reason for separation, and her separation program designator (SPD) code “JFX” (personality disorder) on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was diagnosed with acute stress disorder after reporting a sexual assault in May 95. However, she was involuntarily discharged with a personality disorder a few days later. She has subsequently been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) due to MST (military sexual trauma) by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). She only learned of her in-service psychiatric evaluation and diagnosis of acute stress disorder from the DVA in 2013. She is currently a 100 percent disabled (total and permanent) service-connected veteran due to PTSD, as rated by the DVA. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 24 May 95. On 30 May 95, the applicant was diagnosed at Wilford Hall Medical Center Mental Health Clinic as having acute stress disorder. On 1 Jun 95, the applicant was notified by her commander he was recommending her for discharge for a condition that interferes with military service because she was diagnosed as having acute distress disorder; recommended her for discharge; the case was determined to be legally sufficient; and, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged with an entry level separation (ELS). On 2 Jun 95, the applicant was furnished an ELS, with “uncharacterized” character or service, an SPD code of “JFX,” a narrative reason for discharge of “personality disorder,” a reentry (RE) code of “2C,” and was credited with 9 days of active service. On 10 Feb 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are included at Exhibits D and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR IMA Medical Consultant recommends granting the applicant’s request, indicating there is evidence of an error or injustice. With respect to the request for removal of the narrative reason for separation, a mental health evaluation conducted by a Wilford Hall Medical Center psychologist on 30 May 95 assigned the following Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM IV) diagnoses: Axis I acute stress disorder. The applicant clearly demonstrated signs and symptoms of an acute stress reaction from the traumatic experience that occurred the day prior to arriving at Basic Military Training (BMT). However, the diagnosis of acute stress reaction more accurately portrays the applicant’s psychological diagnosis rather than the personality disorder noted on the DD Form 214. While no medical documentation was provided to substantiate the sexual assault reports provided by the applicant to include a physical examination summary report or other evidence, records indicate the incident had been reported to the Office of the Special Investigation (OSI), but no follow-up documentation was noted. Recommend changing the applicant’s narrative reason for separation to read “Secretarial Authority.” However, the assigned RE code of “2C” correlates with an involuntary separation with an honorable discharge. This RE code most accurately represents the appropriate RE code. Recommend no change be made to the RE code. A complete copy of the BCMR IMA Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSOR recommends denying, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Is has been almost 20 years since the applicant was discharged. The applicant’s commander was provided a report that indicated she was referred for evaluation in response to the applicant indicating she was sexually assaulted in her hotel room the night before arriving at Lackland AFB, TX for BMT. The report concluded the applicant’s symptoms were in the normal range of reactions for a person who had recently experienced a traumatic event however, the applicant was unlikely to recover from the symptoms in a timely enough fashion to give her full attention to BMT. As a result, the commander initiated discharge action. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. Therefore, the SPD code and narrative reason of separation are correct on the DD Form 214. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In further support of her request, the applicant submitted a personal statement explaining the alleged sexual attack and how it impacted her period of service in the military. She reiterates that she was diagnosed with acute stress disorder and not personality disorder, was not aware of that diagnosis until 2013, has been diagnosed with PTSD by the DVA, and has not been able to secure respectable employment for years due to the verbiage on her DD Form 214 (Exhibit G). THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2.  The application was not timely filed. While the applicant claims a date of discovery of less than three years ago, in our view, the reasonable date of discovery of the alleged error or injustice was more than three years ago and the application is therefore untimely. However, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, to include her rebuttal response to the advisory opinion, we believe the applicant is the victim of an error or injustice. While we note the comments of AFPC/DPSOR indicating relief should be denied because the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, we believe a preponderance of the evidence substantiates corrective action is warranted. In this respect, we agree with opinion and recommendation of the BCMR IMA Medical Consultant and adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that in conjunction with her 2 June 1995 entry-level separation, she was issued a narrative reason for separation “Secretarial Authority,” rather than “Personality Disorder,” and a separation program designator (SPD) code of “JFF,” rather than “JFX.” The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-00187 in Executive Session on 9 Dec 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Jan 15. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Jan 15, w/atch. Exhibit D.  Memorandum, BCMR IMA Medical Consultant, dated 15 Sep 15. Exhibit E.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 5 Feb 15. Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Sep 15. Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated 28 Sep 15.